Out-of-touch voters must stop letting our poor Government down

A Labour ally says it’s ‘nuts’ that the public thinks Starmer is worse than Johnson or Truss. When will we see the error of our ways? Daily Telegraph 02/01/26 Michael Deacon After East Germany’s communist regime found itself having to repel an uprising by more than a million citizens in 1953, the great German playwright Bertolt Brecht wrote a short satirical poem, entitled Die Lösung – or, in English, The Solution. Supporters of the regime, it noted dryly, believed that “the people” had “squandered the confidence of the government”. In which case, the poem concluded, would it not make sense “for the government/ To dissolve the people/ And elect another?”

It was hard to avoid recalling those immortal words while reading an article this week in the Financial Times, in which pollsters and other expert observers were asked how on earth our own Government has become so unprecedentedly despised. Indeed, Ipsos says that Sir Keir Starmer is now the most unpopular prime minister in the entire history of polling. According to one Labour ally, however, it’s really quite straightforward. The problem actually lies with the voters themselves. “The idea that Keir Starmer is worse than Boris Johnson or Liz Truss is nuts,” complained Tom Baldwin, who is a former Labour adviser, as well as Sir Keir’s biographer. “Something is going on with the electorate.” I don’t know whether Sir Keir himself shares this Brechtian analysis. But I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he did. It would certainly explain a lot. For example, it would explain why his Government is postponing so many local elections. Sir Keir is simply giving the electorate time to see the error of its ways. Voters will be permitted to vote again only when they’ve demonstrated that they are fit to do so. It would also explain why Sir Keir is granting the vote to 16-year-olds. Since adult voters have proven to be such a disappointment to him, he’s going to give children a go, to see whether they can do any better. At any rate, if Labour is indeed losing faith in the electorate, this is deeply worrying. Something must be done. Which is why I say we voters must urgently draw up a radical plan to help us regain the trust of our poor, disillusioned Government. I suggest that we go knocking on the doors of Labour MPs, promising them that we’ve changed, and setting out a list of bold and exciting pledges to win back their support. Meanwhile, I propose to deliver a major speech, urging out-of-touch families to get out of their bubble and start listening to the legitimate concerns of ordinary, hard-working Cabinet ministers. Admittedly it won’t be easy. Many Labour MPs are likely to respond with cynicism. Voters, they will grumble, have let Labour down so many times in the past. Why should this time be any different? And why should they believe a word we say? We voters are all the same. Only in it for ourselves. Even so, we must beg Labour to give us another chance. Because, if the people no longer enjoy the backing of their rulers, how can we call ourselves a democracy? Show me your papers, baby We all know how determined the Government is to make us carry digital ID. None the less, the public may have been somewhat taken aback by reports that it could be issued not just to adults, but to newborn babies. Personally, I can see the authorities’ point of view. After all, one baby looks very much like another, which means that, if a baby were to carry out a spate of burglaries, commit investment fraud or start trafficking crack cocaine, it would be extremely difficult for police to identify the culprit. Forcing all babies to carry digital ID would surely help officers avoid charging the wrong baby by mistake. Ministers’ enthusiasm for the plan, therefore, is understandable. All the same, I do have a few small queries. First, by what means will babies be expected to carry their digital ID? As it is, many parents worry about whether it’s safe to let teenagers own a smartphone. So they’re bound to have qualms about giving one to a newborn baby. To reassure parents, ministers must pledge to ban the use of social media by anyone under six months old. Second, how does this proposal square with the Government’s stated reasons for introducing digital ID? Last year the Prime Minister told us it was intended to curb illegal immigration. But I for one was unaware that illegal immigrants were sneaking into this country disguised as newborn babies. We do occasionally read of asylum seekers claiming to be rather younger than they look. But I’ve never read of a six-foot Somalian insisting that he was born on the boat he crossed the Channel in. In my view, though, the most important question to ask about this scheme is the following. What exactly will happen if a newborn baby fails to produce its digital ID on demand? Will it be arrested on the spot? Marched down to the station for questioning? “Sir, you do not have to say anything. But anything you do say may be given in evidence.” “Goo goo ga ga.” “Take that down, constable. It could end up being very useful in court.”